House GOP Gives Grudging Nod to Ear

DAVID ESPO

Published 8:00 pm, Monday, January 28, 2002

AP Special Correspondent

House Republican leaders signaled a grudging willingness Tuesday to allow a quick vote on campaign finance legislation, but a leading Senate opponent threatened a filibuster to force last-minute changes.

"It's high on the ASAP list," House Majority Leader Dick Armey, R-Texas, said.

The measure, long opposed by senior Republicans, is designed to reduce the role of money in politics.

Last week the bill's House supporters gained the 218 signatures needed on a petition to force the bill to the floor over the objections of GOP leaders who normally control legislation in the House.

While no date has been set, Armey said Speaker Dennis Hastert had been in touch with supporters of the bill about debating and voting in an "orderly fashion. … It's the disposition of everyone; the leadership, too. We need to do this now as quickly as possible," Armey said. Aides said a vote was possible as early as February.

The legislation would impose a virtual ban on soft money, typically five- and six-figure donations that unions, corporations and individuals make to political parties. Most of the money is spent on critical television commercials that stop just short of explicitly advocating a candidate's election or defeat. The measure also would prohibit certain types of political advertising in the last 60 days of a campaign.

The bill has been intensely contentious in recent years, with Republicans saying the soft money ban would amount to an unconstitutional infringement on free-speech rights. Critics also say that the bill as drafted would give Democrats unfair advantage by allowing labor unions to continue heavy spending on political campaigns.

For their part, supporters said they were discussing relatively minor changes before the measure would be brought to the House floor.

One detail that remains to be settled is the date on which the new rules would take effect _ 30 days after the bill's enactment for the soft money ban. That would fall in the midst of this year's primary season, after both parties had raised millions of dollars in soft money, and several aides said the effective date probably would be changed.

Rep. Christopher Shays, R-Conn., a leading supporter of the bill, said that while his preference is for no change, he's open to one if it is necessary to gain the votes for passage. "I certainly don't want to lose the bill" over the issue, he said.

In the Senate, Majority Leader Tom Daschle has said that if the House bill passes with relatively minor changes, he would seek a vote to send it directly to the White House for Bush's signature.

In an interview, Sen. Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., said that would be an attempt to "bypass" the customary legislative routine and "in effect jam the president."

"I have the votes to avoid that," he said, suggesting a filibuster that would require supporters to amass 60 votes. The measure passed last year on a vote of 59-41.

While House-Senate negotiations are customary on major legislation, other bills routinely avoid that step.

Given the long-standing GOP opposition to the measure, supporters want to avoid formal compromise talks, for fear that the bill would fail to emerge.

But McConnell, the Senate's most vocal critic of the soft money ban, said White House officials had recently signaled they wanted the administration to have a chance to become involved in drafting a compromise.